#322: New release criterion: no X libs in the minimal install set -------------------------------+----------------- Reporter: mattdm | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Release criteria | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: -------------------------------+-----------------
Comment (by kparal):
I like the proposal itself (I also believe minimal install should not contain X), but I don't think QA should be the authority that decides and dictates this condition.
I think currently it is very unclear who manages different flavors of Fedora and who gets the decision powers. Who owns the desktop flavor (or should I call it a spin?)? Who owns the minimal flavor? Who should I report bugs to? Who decides what should be there and what should be not? I don't think FESCo should be bothered every time we want to add a remove a package. It must be someone else.
I'm currently not very clear on these matters, especially wrt minimal flavor. I suspect desktop SIG would own the desktop flavor, but it's very possible that no-one manages minimal flavor at all. I tried to find some document on our wiki that would address this, but I failed. So any explanations are welcome (I guess adamw will know, he knows everything).
After this is cleared up, I think we should talk to the minimal flavor maintainer (or create one first?), whether this is the current policy or not ("no X in minimal") and whether Fedora release should be blocked if some X package happens to enter the set.